where commodore 's fan said C64 is the best , and Atari 's fan said A800 is the best.

this post turned to be a steril discussion that will never end.

As on that forum it seems there is very good A800 programmer and very good C64 programmer also.

So what i propose instead of that steril discussion is to do concrete things.

i propose a kind of contest.

Take a game that does not exist on A800 and C64 , and make it for both . and lets compare the result.

I propose for instance , you adapt the level 1 of the MSX game KnightMare on both plateform.

The goal being to show power of your favorite plateform!.

And then we can judge what is the best plateform.

What do you thing?

A800's fan it is a mean to proof that you plateform is the best.C64's fan it is the way to proof they are wrong.

Personnaly i don't think the A800 is better than a C64 ,but i don't think the opposite is true as well...It is like comparing a Ferrari and a SUV .On a highway , the ferrari is the best , but go "off road"... you will prefer the SUV...

You don't seem to understand how much work you are talking about. Nobody is going to do all that just to satisfy your idle curiosity. I suggest you go ahead and complete a port for one of the machines ( of course, I suggest the a800 ), and then show it to us.

You don't seem to understand how much work you are talking about. Nobody is going to do all that just to satisfy your idle curiosity. I suggest you go ahead and complete a port for one of the machines ( of course, I suggest the a800 ), and then show it to us.

Of course i understand how much work it is. it is why i just said the 1st level and i choosed a relativly easy game to port.

i have now 27 five years of programming experience behind me , i can evaluate how much work it is.

I know well the c64 programming and i have average knowledge on the A800 , if i do this kind of port myself , you will have the same MSX game but with a smoother scrolling that's all. But nothing that will demonstrate that the C64 or the A800 is better.

In addition i'm really busy right now in proramming a new colecovision game and AtomicFE to have time to go back on my C64.

It is why i ask the experts who talk in the other thread to show us and prove that they say.

"I believe what i see" . For now i didn't see any game that prove that the A800 is better than the C64 , and i didn't see any game that prove that the C64 is better than the A800. I just see that some game are sometimes better on one plateform and some other on the other plateform. Generally game are always better on the original plateform than the ported version.

So if you think your machine is better , prove it by fact and not theory.

Nobody in their right mind, fan of one machine or the other, would waste their valuable time porting such a crap game.

I'd sooner put my effort into creating Version 6537 of Tetris.

Agreed. I don't have the experience or time to do this, so you guys can ignore me if you want, BUT...

I think if anyone does this, they should choose a newer, fairly advanced game and port it "back" to both systems. Some of the best games on older systems came from developers squeezing a newer game into them (some of the worst too, it depends on how much you need to squeeze!). Some of the advancement is sheer technology creep, but there are also a lot of new gameplay ideas that can be ported successfully to old machines.

Another idea, to make it little simpler, pick a recent homebrew for one system, for which you know the machine is pushed to its limits, and make a version for the other system. If you don't think that can be done, then realize comparing the two machines is apples vs. oranges and these threads are a huge waste of time.

Anyone for a Katamari Damacy clone/tribute game? (disclaimer: see my very first sentence)

Nobody in their right mind, fan of one machine or the other, would waste their valuable time porting such a crap game.

I'd sooner put my effort into creating Version 6537 of Tetris.

it may look crap due to his poor "scrolling" but this game is really really excellent . it is one of the most famous game on msx.

But this type of game was done on C64 hundred of times and on Atari dozen of times. It's not a challenge.Maybe a better idea is to propose a style game with no precedence on both systems. And this game have to be a pattern with high quality details. It's not a good idea C64 or Atari version improve other details that not exist on original game, only those version should try to get the most near possible to the original.

Nobody in their right mind, fan of one machine or the other, would waste their valuable time porting such a crap game.

I'd sooner put my effort into creating Version 6537 of Tetris.

it may look crap due to his poor "scrolling" but this game is really really excellent . it is one of the most famous game on msx.

But this type of game was done on C64 hundred of times and on Atari dozen of times. It's not a challenge.Maybe a better idea is to propose a style game with no precedence on both systems. And this game have to be a pattern with high quality details. It's not a good idea C64 or Atari version improve other details that not exist on original game, only those version should try to get the most near possible to the original.

you can do the same game using 256 color with the Atari for instance , or overscan or all other you could thing to prove your machine is the best.

But this type of game was done on C64 hundred of times and on Atari dozen of times.

so the c64 is better! i'm jusy kidding

but if both atari guys and c64 guys agreed for another game , no problem , the only important thing is that is the same on both plateform.

I have volontary choosed a "simple" game. Just to let coders be able to enhance it according to their machine possibility.

the coder can add parallax scrolling, color effects, more sprite, bigger bosses , what he wants that can demo the possibility of his machine in the context of a game.

So what you're saying is, take a simple game and have a C64 coder enhance it for the C64 in any way he chooses and a different A8 coder enhance it for the A8 any way he chooses and then compare the results?

Why not just take two random, existing games and compare them? What's the point of creating something new? Imagine the result of this if anyone actually did it: "My C64 version has teh better soundz! It roolz and your lame version droolz!" "Haha! My A8 version has 256 colorz! Mine roolz!" Etc. etc. I.e., the exact same argument we had before.

No one is going to take you up on this, but if you are going to make the proposal at least make it worthwhile: pick three 1985-1990 coin-ops, each with differing strengths to port. Then have some kind of judging/voting when done. Now that's obviously completely unrealistic, but at least, in our fantasyland, if it happened it would at least add something new to the debate.

Reading the mag #01 , i found the Crowland on ATari XL , it is very Nice

But still not at the level of Mayhem in Monsterland on C64

I was just thinking this! The most suprising (at the time) platform game I saw on the Atari was Henry's House. But it's not in the same league as either of the above titles.

I think the "wonder" of both platforms is that they can still surprise even today. Would the C64 be able to do a game like Yoomp! This does not mean the the C64 is an inferior machine.

Both machines are different, there design philosophy is different. This leads to some games being better suited to one or the other. Just picking one game and saying "see what you can do to reinvent it", I really cannot see how this will prove anything. A lot of the outcome would come down to the coders, not the platform. Just let the coders see what how high they can push the envelopes on there respective machines. That is how games like monsterland and Yoomp! come about.

Just recently I have been playing a game called "Batty" on the Sinclair Spectrum(Timex), this is a breakout/arkanoid style game. Even if the game were written on the Atari or C64 I cannot see how it could be any better. Different maybe, but not the same game.

This is like a bunch of kids arguing over who's dad is smarter or who's dad can beat up who.

I grew up with a machine that had 9 colors with crappy choices of which you could use, a 6 bit DAC instead of a sound chip, it ran at under .9 MHz, and it got totally ignored by most major game publishers.
Programmers were still able to create 4 voice music, create lots of colors with NTSC artifacting, and have even taken advantage of a double speed mode that disables the RAM and screen refresh by having the hi speed mode only enabled between screen refreshes.
It also ended up with clones of most arcade games by mom n pop publishers you've never heard of.

It's not the stuff that is easy to do with a machine that seems to really make a game look and play well so much as what you CAN do with it that was never advertised or expected.
The CoCo3 added more graphics modes, more colors, more RAM and a programmable timer. It still doesn't have 256 colors, sprites or a sound chip and yet it has the hands down best version of Donkey Kong for an 8 bit.
That is the type of thing you should set your sights on if you intend to have a competition. (no I'm not talking about beatingvCoCo3 Donkey Kong either)

What I propose...
How about creating a new port of Sinistar? The most accurate version wins.
I figure this is a safe choice since neither platform seems to have the game (an unreleased prototype doesn't count since it's not going to be available any time soon) and it only seems to have made it to two 8 bit machines so it's definitely a challenge.
Judging should be on accuracy of graphics (resolution, color, screen layout, proportions, etc..), sound, speed, game-play, and completeness of the game.
In other words, how close does it look, sound, and play like the arcade machine?
And the speech is a must to have any chance of winning the sound category!

There are two bonus categories.
It must also run on all versions of the target machine. All Ataris, all C64s or whatever. This gets you bonus points.
Format. Disk is ok but the 2nd bonus is for a Cartridge

Each regular category is worth a maximum # of points (to be voted on by a panel of judges and I think I know who can do this) and the two bonus categories are worth a certain number of points each. Bonuses are all or nothing and I chose them because those things make the game more attractive for commercial distribution. ROMs are cheap today so you can bank switch to your heart's content.

If it takes degraded features to run on all versions of a platform it's ok. You still get the bonus but you may lose a points in the other categories.
Perhaps there should be another bonus for difficulty settings since the arcade was brutal, but it should have an arcade difficulty. Or maybe this would just fit under playability and accuracy.

Why like this?
Just duplicating the game in any form is a challenge. Duplicating everything will probably require trade-offs. You can drop resolution for more colors and speed but you'll get docked for resolution accuracy. You can drop colors and go higher res and lose points for color and possibly speed. It will force programmers to try to overcome the limitations of the machine.
It may also favor one machine in one category and the other in another which balances out some limitations for an overall who's best.
It eliminates cheap tricks that are easy on one machine and not the other.
Both machines would benefit from having a port of the game.
It's definitely doable... unless you don't think your machine can handle it.
If cartridges could be sold, $ could go to support the winner's website (Atariage or Lemon 64?)

Graphics, sound and gameplay will probably need to be broken up into sub categories.

This is like a bunch of kids arguing over who's dad is smarter or who's dad can beat up who.

I grew up with a machine that had 9 colors with crappy choices of which you could use, a 6 bit DAC instead of a sound chip, it ran at under .9 MHz, and it got totally ignored by most major game publishers.Programmers were still able to create 4 voice music, create lots of colors with NTSC artifacting, and have even taken advantage of a double speed mode that disables the RAM and screen refresh by having the hi speed mode only enabled between screen refreshes. It also ended up with clones of most arcade games by mom n pop publishers you've never heard of.

It's not the stuff that is easy to do with a machine that seems to really make a game look and play well so much as what you CAN do with it that was never advertised or expected.The CoCo3 added more graphics modes, more colors, more RAM and a programmable timer. It still doesn't have 256 colors, sprites or a sound chip and yet it has the hands down best version of Donkey Kong for an 8 bit.That is the type of thing you should set your sights on if you intend to have a competition. (no I'm not talking about beatingvCoCo3 Donkey Kong either)

What I propose...How about creating a new port of Sinistar? The most accurate version wins. I figure this is a safe choice since neither platform seems to have the game (an unreleased prototype doesn't count since it's not going to be available any time soon) and it only seems to have made it to two 8 bit machines so it's definitely a challenge.Judging should be on accuracy of graphics (resolution, color, screen layout, proportions, etc..), sound, speed, game-play, and completeness of the game.In other words, how close does it look, sound, and play like the arcade machine?And the speech is a must to have any chance of winning the sound category!

There are two bonus categories.It must also run on all versions of the target machine. All Ataris, all C64s or whatever. This gets you bonus points.Format. Disk is ok but the 2nd bonus is for a Cartridge

Each regular category is worth a maximum # of points (to be voted on by a panel of judges and I think I know who can do this) and the two bonus categories are worth a certain number of points each. Bonuses are all or nothing and I chose them because those things make the game more attractive for commercial distribution. ROMs are cheap today so you can bank switch to your heart's content.

If it takes degraded features to run on all versions of a platform it's ok. You still get the bonus but you may lose a points in the other categories.Perhaps there should be another bonus for difficulty settings since the arcade was brutal, but it should have an arcade difficulty. Or maybe this would just fit under playability and accuracy.

Why like this?Just duplicating the game in any form is a challenge. Duplicating everything will probably require trade-offs. You can drop resolution for more colors and speed but you'll get docked for resolution accuracy. You can drop colors and go higher res and lose points for color and possibly speed. It will force programmers to try to overcome the limitations of the machine.It may also favor one machine in one category and the other in another which balances out some limitations for an overall who's best. It eliminates cheap tricks that are easy on one machine and not the other. Both machines would benefit from having a port of the game.It's definitely doable... unless you don't think your machine can handle it.If cartridges could be sold, $ could go to support the winner's website (Atariage or Lemon 64?)

Graphics, sound and gameplay will probably need to be broken up into sub categories.

Yes, i think what you propose is a really good idea. Sinistar , even it is not one of my favorites games, would perfect for this kind of competition.